High Court lets Denaro’s amended £37.8million Quincecare and dishonest assistance claims proceed.
The High Court has allowed Denaro (UK) Limited’s amended claims against Barclays to proceed, while dismissing the bank’s application to strike out the proceedings.
The ruling in Denaro (UK) Limited (in liquidation) v Anthony Bracken & Ors [2026] EWHC 2266 (Ch) was handed down by HHJ Cadwallader in the Business List of the Chancery Division in Liverpool on 4 September 2026. The hearing took place on 29 and 30 July 2026. (Case Law)
The dispute concerns claims brought by Denaro’s liquidators against its former directors and Barclays Bank UK plc and Barclays Bank plc. The claimant alleges that the directors operated a Ponzi scheme through Denaro and Denaro Partners LLP from 2013 onwards.
The liquidators allege that Andrew Wileman, a Barclays relationship manager, dishonestly assisted the directors in alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. They also allege that the bank breached its Quincecare duty by executing transfer instructions given by the directors between 3 May 2013 and 11 August 2023.
The claim against the bank is for approximately £37.8 million. The proceedings remain at an early pleading stage. (Case Law)
The bank had applied under CPR 3.4(2)(a) to strike out the dishonest assistance and Quincecare claims, arguing that the pleadings did not disclose reasonable grounds for bringing the claims.
The court held that the original dishonest assistance claim did not disclose reasonable grounds because it failed sufficiently to identify facts said to establish Mr Wileman’s knowledge in relation to several alleged representations. The pleading also failed to set out the alleged true position in relation to two of the representations. (Case Law)
However, the court found that the original Quincecare claim did disclose reasonable grounds for bringing the claim. The court said the claimant should not rely on unspecified circumstances, but considered that defect capable of being corrected by amendment. (Case Law)
The judge also considered the proposed amended particulars. Permission was granted to amend both the dishonest assistance and Quincecare claims, subject to two specified alterations.
For the dishonest assistance claim, the amended pleading had sufficiently addressed earlier concerns about the factual basis for allegations concerning Mr Wileman’s knowledge. The judge also found the amended Quincecare pleading sufficiently coherent and particularised to be answerable, despite acknowledging that it could have been expressed more clearly. (Case Law)
The court concluded that the amended pleading was sufficiently coherent, particularised and viable to merit a trial.
The revised amended Particulars of Claim must be filed and served within 14 days. The strike-out application was dismissed, while Barclays Bank plc was removed as a defendant because its relevant liabilities had already transferred to Barclays Bank UK plc.